cvs commit: xml-fop/test/resources/fop/svg paints.svg

keiron 2002/06/27 23:21:29 Modified:test/resources/fop/svg paints.svg Log: added some more complicated fills tests use of resources inside patterns Revision ChangesPath 1.2 +20 -4 xml-fop/test/resources/fop/svg/paints.svg Index: paints.svg ===

Re: plan for 0.20.4 release

Hi Christian > here is the plan for the 0.20.4 release > > First there are the following uncommitted patches: > > - reload functionality for AWT viewer > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=102415975220531&w=2 > > - implementation of margin shorthand > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop

cvs commit: xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/fo/expr SystemFontFunction.java

pbwest 2002/06/27 20:32:29 Modified:src/org/apache/fop/fo/expr Tag: FOP_0-20-0_Alt-Design SystemFontFunction.java Log: import ROIntArray Revision ChangesPath No revision No revision 1.1.2.3 +4

cvs commit: xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/fo Properties.java

pbwest 2002/06/27 20:29:44 Modified:src/org/apache/fop/fo Tag: FOP_0-20-0_Alt-Design Properties.java Log: Added FOTree arg to complex() method signature. Inital code for font shorthand support. Revision ChangesPath No revision

cvs commit: xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/fo PropertySets.java

pbwest 2002/06/27 20:24:42 Modified:src/org/apache/fop/fo Tag: FOP_0-20-0_Alt-Design PropertySets.java Log: Added methods to support shorthand expansion Revision ChangesPath No revision No revision

Re: [PATCH] Proper use of font encodings for "native" fonts

Attached is the patch for the development version of fop. Some remarks: 1) With ant version 1.4.1 ant-optional.jar is not needed. 2) There are two new files src/codegen/encodings.xml and src/codegen/glyphlist.xml. 3) I have problems building fop with xalan version 2.2D11 (see bug 9706 for ant).

Re: documentation for the maintenance branch

Joerg Pietschmann schrieb: [..] > That's exactly what I'm currently doing, the HTML and the > intermediate document-DTD files are produced in the build > directory. Unfortunately, as I already noted, it's an > all-or-nothing thing unless you are comfortable with broken > doc builds for some time

Re: documentation for the maintenance branch

J.Pietschmann schrieb: [..] > The last checkin showed a "generate commit notification mail" > or something, but I didn't get one either. AFAIK your commit mail needs to be approved once. Best thing would be to ask root. > J.Pietschmann Christian -

plan for 0.20.4 release

Ok, here is the plan for the 0.20.4 release First there are the following uncommitted patches: - reload functionality for AWT viewer http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=102415975220531&w=2 - implementation of margin shorthand http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=102483701915153&w=2

[ANN] New FOA Release: 0.3.0

Hello, there is a new FOA (Formatting Object Authoring tool) release: 0.3.0 Now there are these additional features: - Complex Table Brick (full FO table implementation with Body, Headers and Footers) - Page Number Brick - Multiple Headers/Footers for each Page Sequence - Compliant with

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 10287] New: - fop 0.20.4RC is unable to run with Aelfred xml parser

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_b

Re: documentation for the maintenance branch

Joerg, Joerg Pietschmann wrote: > "Peter B. West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Obviously there is a need for some documention with normal releases. We >>don't need the design docs in the user releases, but all of the >>operational material, including the FAQs, is necessary. >> >>If we were

Re: documentation for the maintenance branch

On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 14:39, Joerg Pietschmann wrote: > +1 on omitting the design doc completely in bin distributions. > Should probably omit skin source and xsl too. +1 also. > I'm not sure about PDF, apparently there are not much requests > for this format. > What's larger: > - PDF > - xdocs +

[Fwd: Re: Licence short or long]

Board members: I seem to recall that the long form is required... is there any definitive statement to this effect that can be used as guidance to the various projects? PMC members: this seems to me to be a PMC issue. Original Message Subject: Re: Licence short or long Date:

[GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

This email is autogenerated from the output from: Buildfile: build.xml init-avail: init-filters-xalan2: [copy] Copying 1

cvs commit: xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/fo FOAttributes.java FObject.java FObjectNames.java FObjects.java FONode.java FoRoot.java FOTree.java PropertyConsts.java PropertySets.java PropNames.java

pbwest 2002/06/27 05:55:19 Modified:src/org/apache/fop/fo Tag: FOP_0-20-0_Alt-Design FOAttributes.java FObject.java FObjectNames.java FObjects.java FONode.java FoRoot.java FOTree.java PropertyConsts.java PropertySe

Re: documentation for the maintenance branch

"Peter B. West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Obviously there is a need for some documention with normal releases. We > don't need the design docs in the user releases, but all of the > operational material, including the FAQs, is necessary. > > If we were to do source and compiled releases, th

cvs commit: xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/svg PDFGraphics2D.java PDFTextElementBridge.java

keiron 2002/06/27 04:45:55 Modified:src/org/apache/fop/image AbstractFopImage.java BmpImage.java EPSImage.java FopImage.java GifImage.java JAIImage.java JimiImage.java JpegImage.java src/org/apache/fop/layout FontState.java

Re: Licence short or long

Hi Chunk, Yes, that does parse better, although the peculiarities of the ASF structure are beyond me, I'm afraid. One day I must do some serious study. Thanks for following up on this. Peter Arved Sandstrom wrote: > Well, if by "ASF" you mean the board, then that sentence parses better. > B

Re: documentation for the maintenance branch

Fopdevs, Obviously there is a need for some documention with normal releases. We don't need the design docs in the user releases, but all of the operational material, including the FAQs, is necessary. If we were to do source and compiled releases, the xml-docs could go into the source releas

RE: Licence short or long

Well, if by "ASF" you mean the board, then that sentence parses better. Because a mini-chunk of the ASF is already here and as uninformed as the rest. :-) Seriously, though, I'll track down board minutes and see where this is explained, and report back. Arved > -Original Message- > From

Re: Licence short or long

Which means, I suppose, that we do nothing until we receive official notification from the ASF. Peter Jeremias Maerki wrote: > Arved > > I totally agree with you. What confuses me, though, is the fact that the > ASF doesn't control and enforce its policies in every project. > Communication is